15/05/2017 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Theresa May is promising a "new deal for workers" and "the greatest

extension of rights for employees by any Conservative

"Tory cuts have exposed the NHS to cyber attack" -

so says Jeremy Corbyn, as he pledges an extra 37 billion

In a previous life, Jeremy Corbyn's views often differed from mainstream

I am, of course, in Newcastle, finding out just how excited

people are about manifesto launches this week.

If you don't read the manifesto, you don't know

And it's quite important to know what's happening to your country.

All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole

of the programme today - Kwasi Kwarteng, who's

running for re-election for the Conservatives,

First today, Theresa May has said that she will bring forward

what she calls "the greatest expansion in workers'

rights by any Conservative government in history",

It's being seen as an attempt to appeal to Labour voters

Theresa May says that, after Brexit, she will keep all the workers'

rights that are currently guaranteed by EU law.

The National Living Wage will go up in line with average earnings over

The views of workers will be represented on company boards,

although this could just done by a workers' representative,

And the Conservatives are also promising new statutory leave rights

for people who have suffered a child bereavement,

need to care for a family member, or want to undertake training.

And the Conservatives will also amend existing legislation to extend

protections for workers with mental health conditions.

The Labour Party unveiled their own workers' rights

Their plans included a ?10 an hour minimum wage by 2020,

ending the public sector pay cap, banning zero hours contracts

Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats announced last week that they'll

introduce a so-called "father's month" -

that's an additional month of paid parental leave for fathers.

This was Theresa May talking about those plans this morning.

What we're doing today is announcing the biggest ever

enhancement of workers' rights by a Conservative government.

And, yes, there are various elements to this.

But we're, for example, committing that the national

Living Wage will continue to rise in line with median earnings.

Yes, that people will be able to request time off

to care for a relative and we want to support

I've been today at a fantastic organisation, TechPixies,

helping women who have been taking time out of work looking

after children to get the skills to get back into the workplace,

This is what we want to see more of in the future.

Joining me now is Frances O'Grady, General Secretary of

What's your response, do you embrace these proposals? This is promising

and I'm pleased all major parties are competing on our turf. Fighting

for workers' votes on issues that matter to working people. I think in

respect to Theresa May's proposals, we need much more detail. How many

of these rights like family leave will be writes for paid leave,

otherwise they'll just writes for the well off. I heard comments on

the national minimum wage. There is a pre-existing promise that this

should be at least 60% of median earnings by 2020. I would like that

clarified. And on the deep economy, zero hours and self-employment --

the gig economies. I don't want to wait for Matthew Taylor's review. I

think we should hear now on what the Conservatives want to do on what is

a modern-day scandal. What do you think about the claim that this is

an historic offer being made to workers by the Conservative

government? I've spent my life campaigning for a better deal for

workers. I'm very pleased that all main parties are competing on this

ground. It's important, and I think there is a recognition that working

people have had a tough deal. The corporate governance system is

rigged against not just working people but the long-term success of

companies. We need a stronger voice for working people and I would like

to hear a positive story about the role of unions as well. Because

that's the best way of ensuring people can enforce rights. Otherwise

they have to fork out more than ?1000 in an employment tribunal to

make real. All these rights might be well and good but in the end if

wages will be squeezed further by the rise in inflation and rising

prices, will workers be that bothered about some of the rights

they may or may not get depending on who is in government? The rights are

important to guarantee we have a level playing field. It's only if

workers come together collectively that we can enforce those rights and

improve people's living standards. This was the big gap in the story

today. What are we going to do, not just about the very low paid, but

ordinary workers who are, as the Prime Minister said, struggling to

get by? And we have still got those pay limits on public service workers

meaning in real terms they will be worse off against point labour says

it will remove that pay cap on public service workers. What sort of

rises would you like to see for those workers? The TUC have said

clearly that where there are independent pay review bodies, they

should be genuinely independent and their recommendations should be

heeded. Otherwise we need real collective bargaining. That's the

only way we can ensure that we get a fair distribution of the wealth that

is created, whether that's in the private or public sector. What sort

of level, though? Because that will in turn have an impact on the

economy if there are higher wage rises for certain sectors, whether

it's private or public. The great benefit of collective bargaining and

independent pay review bodies is that they look at affordability and

fairness and you come to an agreement. Thank you very much,

Frances O'Grady. We did ask the Conservatives

for a front bench spokesman to comment on this major policy

announcement, but they said But we do have Conservative MP

Kwasi Kwarteng and we're also joined by Ian Lavery,

Labour's Elections Coordinator. You have announced this 11 point

plan on workers' rights. Is it fully costed? I just want to say, I'm not

an MP, I'm a candidate. Thank you. The broad point is that we have a

strong and stable government and we want something that has a broader

reach. It's an attractive policy that I think will get lots of people

who haven't necessarily voted Conservative in the past. Is it

properly costed? Of course. It will be costed in terms of having a plan

to balance the budget. That's not the same as a fully costed plan. You

always say to Labour when they announced their policies, how will

they pay for it? Is it through higher income tax, or a reversal

incorporation tax, or whatever it is? Using the broad economy is not

saying it's fully costed. There is a difference because when Labour have

specific spending commitments, saying so much for 10,000 extra

policeman, they don't actually know the numbers. So how will you find

this new plan for statutory rights? The point about the regulation is we

are not saying we are going to know how many people will use and

exercise those rights. To put it a different way, have you done a full

impact assessment? If I take your point we're not talking about... We

are not talking about specific numbers because we don't know how

may people will use those rights. So in a sense, it's not fully costed.

We have a broad assessment. I'm sure that will be revealed in the

manifesto. I'm saying it's not right to suggest it's the same as when

Labour make specific spending commitments because we don't know

how many people will use those rights. In a way it's exactly the

same. If you put the same onus on the opposition or the Labour Party

to cost its proposals, people expect the Conservatives to do the same.

You say we will keep all the workers' rights we get from the EU

after Brexit but there is nothing to stop a future Conservative

government watering down those rights in years to come. This is

entirely hypothetical. We don't even know who will win the election. No

votes have been cast. To talk about a hypothetical Conservative

government at some point in the future is getting ahead of

ourselves. Is it? Because if you say we will keep all the workers' rights

we get from the EU after Brexit, that's quite a bold claim and it

would be meaningless if in five years' time those rights disappear.

What the government has said is that we are committed to keeping the

rights... For the time being. We do not know what will happen in 2022.

No party can say what their platform will be then. We have a broad

commitment by this Prime Minister to protect workers' rights, and not

only protect them, but extend them in a way no other Conservative

government has done in my recollection ever. It's an

extraordinary and exciting development. I think it will work

very well. Do you accept that we can't state and no party can clearly

state at this point what they might do? In 2022? No party can do that.

Returnship, you wrote a book recently with colleagues in the

Conservative Party... Five years ago. That's not that long ago. You

said British workers were I'd list. The pamphlet said laziest. You said

all this business about social services being cut to the bone will

stop you said things about Labour's, the rights of employees had to be

reduced. That's your view. This is a long journey. I hope people who are

listening and weighing this up know this is a long journey. The purpose

of this is due in the end reduce workers' rights. You can't say that.

Let's go back to the first point Helena Kennedy mix. You were part of

a group of free enterprise MPs. There was a book, a pamphlet

written... It was a book. You said British workers were idlers. It was

a quotation in the book. It was from someone else. It was a book

published in 2012. Let him answer and I will come to you. Anybody can

see the world is in a completely different place to where we were

five years ago. We have Brexit. We are committed to securing workers'

rights. You said yourself that as a consequence of Brexit workers'

rights would be in jeopardy. We said no. The Prime Minister has come out

with an exciting package and all you can do is criticise. I would think

you would welcome these improvements. Ian Lavery. Priti

Patel, International Development Secretary, said in the referendum

campaign last year that there could be a boost to the economy and

600,000 new jobs. She was also contributed to that book. Where is

the bonfire of regulation? As far as I can see you are adding to the

regulations with this 11 point plan? The Prime Minister's position was

always clear. When she was elected she said she wanted a country and

economy that worked for everyone. This announcement embeds that and

wants to extend and seek to extend rights. I find it extraordinary that

opposition parties are arguing against it. We are not arguing

against it. I thought you would welcome this development. These

ideas have been around and discussed by Labour politicians and Liberal

Democrat politicians. This is not some new invention, I can assure

you. But for a Conservative may be. That's the point of the quote from

the Prime Minister. They are all over Labour's territory. That's the

purpose. It's windowdressing to challenge the fact that Labour will

in the end do things about creating employment and employees rights.

Nobody is arguing against it. It is terrific. In the long term, there is

no money costed for it.... It is terrific, though. Absolutely, but

it's stolen from others. I have been very patient! You have, now I will

turn my attention to you. It has been broadly welcomed by the TUC.

Helena Kennedy said it was terrific. What say you? I've got to say, it's

amazing hearing Kwasi Kwarteng suggest that the Conservative Party

are now the party of the working people. He wrote a book that said

British workers were idlers and lazy and would prefer to lie in bed than

go out and do a day off work. Do you think the working people of this

country will forget that? Do you think the working people are fooled

by your rhetoric? It's an outrage to make such remarks about the people

in this country. You're not going to get away with that. We have already

had a go at Kwasi Kwarteng for what he and others said in the book. What

about the proposals today? I think the proposals today, the bombshell

for me and the Labour Party is the fact that it has gone largely

unreported that the people in this country, working people, are set to

lose ?2300 between now and 2020 as a result of bereaved calculation of

the national living wage. -- of the recalculation.

Are these proposals good or not? The most important one on explaining its

full working people, how they pay for food and how they feed their

children. What we have in this document is a bombshell on working

people which will mean that ?2300 per annum worse off in 2020. Frances

O'Grady clearly said, also picking up on the question I put her on the

squeeze on wages, but she said used all need workers' rights and you

still need the sorts of rights outlined by the Conservatives with

the backing of Kwasi Kwarteng. I am saying to you, do you support them?

We have a 20 point plan released two weeks ago with regard to workers'

rights. If you scrutinise that 20 point plan it's far and away much

better in terms of securing people in the workplace. You do have your

own plan for workers' rights. The plan is far better than what has

been suggested this morning. All right, let's take it bit by bit and

see if it is an improvement. Would the Labour government create new

statutory leave indictments for carers, people who want training and

have suffered a child bereavement? Yes. You would match those. What

about people working in the gig economy, working for taxi firms like

Uber. The Conservatives say they will intimate revue carried out by

the former Tony Blair adviser. We have 460,000 people working in bogus

soft employment in the low-wage economy. We have 1 million people

and more. What would you do for them? We are going to get rid of

zero-hours contracts. We have 1 million people on zero-hours

contracts. We have 1.5 million people stuck on the minimum wage.

How many of those people on zero-hours contracts want to be on

zero-hours contracts? Let me just say this because it's important.

People who are in this country who are working 40 hours a week claiming

benefits, we have people in this country working 40 hours per week

using food banks including nurses on the NHS. I am asking for the

solutions and proposals to deal with it. How can the Tory government come

forward and suggest in any way they are the party for the working

people? You have not answered my question. How many of the people on

zero-hours contracts, how many of them want to be on those contracts

and what the flexibility rightly or wrongly? The vast majority don't

want to be. How can anybody want to be on the zero-hours contract?

People do, they want to have that flexibility and I think your

approach where you just say this is what is going to happen, it is de

Reid Fiest, a top-down approach, some people want to have a

flexible... Very few people. A few people and more than you think.

Let's talk about the public sector pay cut I put this to Frances

O'Grady and she said you would need an independent pay body. How much

should it go up and how much would it cost? When you look at it public

sector employees have not had a pay rise since 2000... I'm not asking

that. I'm just saying, they have not had a pay rise, they don't know what

a pay rise is only more so it's important we pay these most

important people in society a fair and decent wage. It's not up to me

to predict what they should be paid but they certainly need a pay rise.

Families in this country... Are you talking about a significant pay

rise? They are earning less now than they were in 2010. That cannot be

the case and we have got a bridge that gap. There are families in this

country now earning less than what they were in 2007, never mind 2010.

?1400 a year worse off, that cannot be the case. I will put that to

Kwasi Kwarteng, Ian Lavery, we need to let you go, but thank you for

being on the programme. Let's go back to the squeeze on wages because

that's the story now, because with inflation at 2.3%, wages are being

squeezed. It is hard and what he said about public sector pay is

true, a difficult period, there is no point denying that. We also have

to remember that the deficit in 2010 was ?160 billion, we were borrowing

?3 billion a week as a government, as a country, and that was clearly

unsustainable and we have to make tough decisions and that was what

the 2015 general election was fought on, we make difficult decisions,

restrained spending and we had to do do that because otherwise we were

heading for a sovereign debt crisis. Now you think it should be lifted?

I'm not in a position to say, as Ian didn't answer the question, what the

level should be, but there is no doubt it has been a difficult time.

We are getting through. There is no point laughing or pretending that we

didn't have a terrible deficit which had to be dealt with. The thing was

that the opportunity was taken to make ordinary people pay the price.

The price was not paid by the super wealthy. The top 1%. You don't look

after ordinary people. The top 1% pay more tax. Ordinary people, all

of us, we have paid the price. The top 1% pay more tax... We have to

move on otherwise we will not get through the rest of the programme.

Talking over each other does not help the viewer either.

The question for today is, what did Russian President Vladimir

Putin do before meeting Chinese President Xi

A - Ride through Beijing on a Harley Davidson.

B - Explore sunken shipwrecks in the South China Sea.

C - Practise judo with a Chinese national champion.

Or D - Play Soviet-era songs on a grand piano?

The mind boggles, he probably could have done all of them!

At the end of the show Helena and Kwasi will give

Labour's big announcement on health today comes after a weekend

dominated by news of the cyber attack which hit

Speaking to the Royal College of Nurses in Liverpool,

Jeremy Corbyn pleged to spend an extra ?37 billion

on the NHS in England over the next five years if it wins power.

The investment would be funded by tax increases

Labour says the money would be used to upgrade IT systems

Take one million people off waiting lists by guaranteeing

Set a new one-hour A target for the most urgent cases

and guarantee no more than a four-hour wait

Set a new target to tackle bed blocking by patients waiting

for care arrangements before they can be released from hospital.

And cancer patients to be seen within four weeks.

Here's what the Labour leader had to say in Liverpool earlier today.

Nothing embodies our campaign theme, for the many not the few, better

Universal lifelong health care free at the point of need.

However, our health service is actually being

Over the past seven years our National Health

Service has been driven into crisis after crisis.

A departments struggling to cope, waiting lists

soaring, and we saw last week Tory cuts exposed patient services to

I'm joined now by two humble scribes who don't mind standing

Kate McCann from The Daily Telegraph, and the political

Matthew d'Ancona, a poll has found the NHS has overtaken Brexit as

voters' most important concern. Does Jeremy Corbyn's big NHS announcement

today matched by quite big money, is it timely? It is certainly the right

terrain for Jeremy Corbyn because Labour always felt comfortable

talking about health. Naturally in the wake of a cyber warfare attack

it is absolutely a natural subject for him. I think the problem will

come because of the money that is necessary to pay for all of this.

That takes Labour straight back onto the economic issue, which is one of

its weakest. Isn't that going to be a tag line from the Conservatives,

Kate McCann, all about unaffordable spending pledges? They have said

they will tax people earning ?80,000 a little bit more. Surely it would

have to be a lot more to me that build. It would have to be a lot

more, billions of pounds more and Jon Ashworth, Labour's Shadow Health

Secretary, this morning was saying the 45p rate would hit those earning

more than ?85,000 and there is an assumption they would introduce a

50p rate of tax for those on ?150,000 or more. The problem is Jon

Ashworth said that would raise about ?4.5 billion and they need ?6

billion. The list of proposals that he read out from Jeremy Corbyn is

likely to cost far more than that. So there is still quite some money

to find if that is what Labour will promise the country. Let's talk

about the cyber-security issue, which exploded at the weekend. As

the government response been big enough, do you think, Matthew

d'Ancona? I think they are claiming they have 95% of health outlets back

online. I think this is an issue where they will have to be lots of

reassurance. This is not only a health issue, it is a security

issue, which is why Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, rather than Jeremy

Hunt the Health Secretary, has been leading the fight back as it were. I

think it's an incredibly important issue and goes far beyond the limits

of this campaign. It's got to do with the vulnerability of the

biggest health network in the world to a cyber-attack. This was a weapon

that had been used by hackers. It wasn't a foreign attack. It was

clearly just a group of amateurs using ransomware. You cannot have

the NHS is subject to this kind of attack and not be concerned about

it. Kate McCann, in your mind is Jeremy Corbyn using this as a stick

to beat the Government with in this campaign? Will that actually bring

results, do you think, to the Labour campaign? It is funny you say that

because I have a couple of friends in the RCM conference in Liverpool

this morning and they said they didn't think politicising the issue

was a good idea. It works well for Labour because it shows the NHS is

vulnerable to these attacks and gives them another way to save the

Tories are not spending enough money on the health service but it's

probably not that wise because we are likely to see more and more

cyber attacks like this and if Labour are in power they will have

to inject a huge amount of money to protect the NHS and we know from

previous computer programmes and big IT projects, particularly in the

NHS, they tend to go massively overbudget. Right, they made those

promises today, the Labour Party, which adhere, if not in this

programme, late on the BBC from Jeremy Hunt with an interview he did

on this issue. This remains controversial but the health

Department say they have been updating their protective measures

quite aggressively and that very few of the trusts were not warned. The

problem is the more decentralisation you have the harder it is to

regulate. You are always trying to strike a balance between the

benefits of decentralisation in the health service and proper

regulation. I think there will be big lessons to be learned from this.

In terms of the debates, Kate, we know there will be leaders' debate

on Thursday on ITV but they will be no Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn and

ITV said they will not empty chair the missing leaders. Is that right

strategy? It works well for Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn because if

viewers tune in they may not be aware that the Prime Minister and

leader of the Labour Party were meant to attend in the first place

so it looks better for them if there isn't an empty podium with their

names on it. I wonder how many people will tune in on a Thursday

night if the two big hitters aren't taking part. It's probably quite

disappointing that the two people who realistically, and the one

person realistically, who could be running the country will not be

there. We will have to see when we look at the ratings the week.

Casting ahead to the end of the week, looking at manifestos, Matthew

d'Ancona. In this post-truce Iraq which I know you have written

something about, what do you think counts when it comes to grabbing

voters' attention? I don't think voters look for a shopping list of

specific policies or granular detail. But what they do look for is

the trajectory that the country is going to pursue under the specific

party in question. So the question really will be, to take the

Conservative manifesto, is there more to this really interesting new

direction the Conservatives under Theresa May are taking, which is to

try and capture the working class vote? What we have heard today is a

taster and people will look for more in the pages of what we are told

will be the proverbial slim document. Thank you to both of you,

enjoy the campaign. Let's pick up on the cyber-security. Should the

government have taken more notice of those warnings a year ago in terms

of protecting NHS trusts, particularly when it came to their

IT programmes? I think we can always be wise after the event. We can

always look at a problem and say we could have done more, we could have

done this or that. They were warned. What I would say is the government

has committed something like 1.9 billion to the national cyber

Security Centre, something that is new and has not happened before. I

think the government did have a sense that cyber-security was going

to be a big issue, that people were going to be concerned about it and I

think this investment was an excellent development. Could we have

done more to prevent this? May be. What I would also say this was an

international attack. 150 countries were subject to this attack. It was

a global crisis, if you like. I think we are well placed as a

country generally to deal with this sort of attack because of the

National Cyber Security Centre. Are you one of those who is wise after

the event? I was speaking to my friends who sits on a hospital trust

and she was saying the reality is there is so little money left at the

end of the day that in fact when you are talking about the spend, the

capital spend, which has to be on new equipment. Buildings. On

buildings, and then on your computer system, she said you are down to the

small amounts. Talking about more money to add to the ?37 billion you

want to spend over the next few years? I think you really need to

have people with real skills in this and we really have to have a proper

look at it and it is going to cost money inevitably. It will cost

money. Who is going to pay for that, people who are in over ?80,000?

There has to be a complete rethink about this economy and it won't

happen in the hands of the Conservative Party. This business

about low taxation and not looking after your nation's people and the

things that make things good for them must be revisited. The Labour

Party at the moment, there was a dismissal of the league of the

manifesto. I think you are going to find the real challenge to the

neoliberal economics that has been the product of Kwasi and you will

see more money. Will it be credible? John McDonnell, the Shadow

Chancellor, made it clear the increases on those earning ?80,000 a

year, which is what he wants to do, would be modest? One of the more

radical if you want to pay for these things? You need to tax people more.

Labour need to win the trust of people so they think they can manage

the economy so they must be cautious but what I'm saying is we have to

challenge the business of a low tax economy. There is not that much

difference between the two. A transactional tax is something Kwasi

would oppose because he was a banker. Robin Hood tax. Let me... It

was deemed as causing flight of capital. This is different, isn't

it, Kwasi Kwarteng? There are two things that struck me.

One is that it's about looking after people and there are two issues were

polling well on, very strong on the economy and also on security. This

idea Jeremy Corbyn is the man to keep us safe when we know about his

links with the IRA and his support for Hamas... On really! And his

championing of Venezuela under Hugo Chavez. That was a Conservative

attack line. Party mangers are presenting

Jeremy Corbyn as an alternative choice in this General Election

campaign and in a previous life his views were outside Labour's

mainstream thinking. But does this matter

now that he's leader? Over the last few days we've

put some of Jeremy's previously-expressed views to senior

Labour figures. The radical end, the left

of the unions and the Labour Party, have got to be realistic that Nato

is a major problem and a major difficulty,

and we have to campaign against Nato's power,

its influence and its global reach, because it is a danger to world

peace and a danger I think that's a quote from six

years ago, and Jeremy has been on a journey,

to coin a phrase. Come the end of the Cold War

in 1990, that should have been the time for Nato to shut up shop,

give up, go home and go away. What is very clear is that

when you are the leader of a political party,

you have to go with You have to go along

with the collective view. And the collective view

is that we support Nato, and we support remaining

a member of Nato. And that is what

Jeremy is promoting. Fabian Hamilton. So how many more

videos of Jeremy Corbyn contradicting party policy can

Labour politicians expect to be played to them in this campaign? I

think Lynton Crosby has been saving them up. He's running the campaign.

I think we will have them drip fed to the public over the next few

weeks. All I will say is... It's a bit like, I'm a lawyer and a

barrister, and it's a bit like when lawyers have been on one side of a

case, and then you become a judge and you have to behave slightly

differently. Is that like being the leader of a party where you have to

stand on a manifesto where you don't necessarily believe. Has he changed

his mind on things like Nato? Theresa May was in favour of

remaining. Lots of remain politicians now have to say they are

in favour of leaving Europe. People have to listen to others and grow

and change. Has he changed his mind on Nato? I hope that he has. It

makes absolute sense, particularly looking at Russia today, to be

involved with Nato. I hope he has made the shift, but even if he

hasn't, everybody else around them has formed a particular view, and

he's going with that, just like Theresa May is going with leaving

the European Union. Those shifts happen in politics. There are plenty

of remain politicians on the Conservative side. I find it

extraordinary that earlier in the programme Helena Kennedy quoted a

book I wrote with four are the people in 2012 and said I should be

held accountable for that. Now we see the clips of Jeremy Corbyn and

she now says he has changed, things have changed. Have you changed your

view of the British workers? The point has been made that people on

both sides can change their mind. Fundamentally, whether he has

changed or not is beside the point. From his manifesto we are seeing a

return to 1970s, Marxist, hard left agendas that have no evidence people

will support them, which will financially bankrupt the country. Is

it credible to voters that the collective view of the Labour Party

on issues like the renewal of Trident and issues like Nato and

other issues where Jeremy Corbyn personally might not agree with him,

that they override the leader of the Labour Party, who wants to be the

next Prime Minister. The reality is that we are a Democratic party and

policies are made around decisions that are... Are they credible to

voters? People are going on the doorsteps and saying we need Labour

politicians because we need a Labour government to change the business of

ruining the lives of most people in this country. That's what the

Conservative Party has done with austerity. Let's leave that. That's

an emotional response and I take that. But it practically, in the

Labour manifesto will make last Wednesday there was a commitment to

the Nato benchmark of 2% of GDP on defence spending as well as renewing

the Trident nuclear deterrent. But if Jeremy Corbyn can never envisage

using Trident, what's the point of paying lip service to something you

will never use mustard yellow nobody imagines using Trident. Nobody

really imagines using it. -- will never use? Nobody imagines using

Trident. He says he will never use it. That won't deter anyone. The

point is, he's not in there on his own. He's part of a Democratic party

and there will be a cabinet of democratically elected politicians.

Only the Prime Minister would make a critical decision on those decisions

and defence. And you think if we were facing a bomb heading in our

direction from Russia that he wouldn't... I really don't think he

would. In terms of it being a Democratic party, isn't that a

healthy thing? One of the criticisms about Theresa May's campaign is that

it has been presidential in its style. It has been about her, and

that might be the right approach. Very much about team May. Not much

about how the country is run and Conservative Party of the Democratic

party. There are 650 constituencies and individual battles in everyone.

I was spending time with a great candidate in Twickenham yesterday.

That did not feel presidential, it was a street by street constituency

election of the kind we used to. I don't buy the narrative that we have

somehow become presidential. The irony is that the people who

complain about presidential elections are the very people who

complain Theresa May isn't doing gay debate. Those are imports from

America, the Leaders' Debate 's. And France as well. It is presidential.

You can't complain that it's presidential and then say we have to

have leaders debates. We have always had in this country a sense of who

the Prime Minister would be after a general election and that's an

entirely legitimate field of discussion. Do you think David

Cameron was wrong in taking part? I never thought the leaders' debates

were fitting for a parliamentary system that we have. Because it is

presidential. When you put the leaders on a pedestal and ask those

questions it is presidential. Then stop attacking Jeremy Corbyn if it's

not about the leader. It is entirely right to question Jeremy Corbyn. You

go after him because you don't want to look at the policies. The

policies are the thing that really matter. I hope they will matter in

this election. So, most of the parties

are publishing their "Hurrah", I hear you say.

"Extra bedtime reading!" And do they have any

effect on how people vote? Ellie Price has been

in Newcastle with the trusty Welcome to Gateshead and Newcastle,

where there is an air of anticipation because this week

the parties will publish But the big question -

do the manifestos affect Although I was brought up to be

a Labour voter my parents Diane Abbott, Jeremy Corbyn?

Thornberry? So there's nothing they can

say in their manifesto? The Tories are going to concentrate

on Brexit and try and get a strong and stable leadership

which is the shallow one-liner that Mrs May's decided she's

going to come out with. I don't think we're going

to get anything more. The manifestos are

coming out this week. Will that affect the way you vote?

Probably not. Because I couldn't vote for Corbyn

if he was the last man on Earth. And whatever he says

in his manifesto? Because he wouldn't be

able to carry it out. And does it matter what's

in the Tory manifesto then? Will you vote for them?

Yes. Regardless of what's

in the manifesto? I'll probably read it, well,

I'll scan through it because I'm not going to read the whole thing,

it's about 50-odd The manifestos always

lie to you, don't they? Any of you going to bother reading

the party manifestos? I've already kind of made my mind up

where I'm going to go but I'll definitely read them to give

everybody an equal chance. If you don't read the manifesto,

you don't know what they're going to do and it's quite important

to know what's happening Corbyn's been a good leader,

I think he'd be a good We know what's in the manifesto.

We know what's in it. Would the manifestos

change the way you vote? Probably not because I think I'm

just going to vote for the best option for getting rid

of the Tories. Yeah, in this case it is

going to be tactical. The Labour seats in this

part of the world have The results of our mood box

today, pretty marginal. But overall it seems that no,

the party manifestos won't influence Joining me now is Tim Bale,

professor of politics from Perhaps no surprise, the result of

that very unscientific mood box. Is there any evidence manifestos can

make a difference and persuade people to change their vote? There

is not a lot of evidence to suggest people read them in the first place.

However, having said that, there is evidence that indirectly they can

make a difference. Broadcasters such as yourself and the print media pick

up on them and they are the only authoritative statement of what the

parties will do after they get into government. That's why we are so

desperate to have them. And they are coming shortly this week. You see

them broadly as an asset rather than liability? It rather depends on

what's in them. One of the problems for Labour and the league, there was

an upside in that it got people talking about it. And they will have

another go. It also gave GCHQ and anybody who wants to attack the

Labour Party to do all the costings and suggest the manifesto will cost

this much instead of what Labour say it will cost. In many ways it could

be a liability. The parties hold a lot of stalled by them. I know they

haven't had as much time in this election but they spend a lot of

time and thought on the manifestos and producing big documents. They

know most people probably don't read them in depth but they still do

them. There are several reasons to do that. The first is to mobilise

their own activists. You want your own people going on the doorstep to

be enthused about the policies they are selling and they have to have an

idea of what the policies are. That's not the only reason. Parties

also have to decide where they stand and the manifesto process is a

really good way of doing that. It's a good way of sorting out arguments

within the party periodically. And if you think you are going to be in

government, they are vital because these are the documents civil

servants pour over in a few weeks before polling day so when new

ministers come into posts or the old ministers, they can present those

ministers with a brief and say, this is what you said you will do. This

is what we think you can do and let's work on it. And holds you to

it. Absolutely, that's the other function, accountability.

In terms of other previous elections are there any notable examples of

where there was an upturn, if you like, in the polls as a result of

the manifesto being published or a downturn, or any particular

policies? It is difficult to pinpoint a downturn but what you can

say is the danger of manifestos for governments is they can create

hostages to fortune. The 1970 Conservative government is a good

example, they came from opposition with a whole lot of detailed

policies they then tried to implement without much flexibility

or change and they got into trouble. They got stuck and had to do a

U-turn and that government was one of the most unsuccessful and most

unpopular. The Liberal Democrats promising they would get rid of fees

and then going into government and turning Turkey on it almost

immediately. For the young who had voted for them and come out in

droves that really stuck in their gullet. Is that a warning for the

Labour Party in this manifesto? It is always important if you are going

to do something you have to be treated. Scrapping tuition fees is

going to be something for the Labour Party will hold two? You've got to

be careful about what you promise because if you get in there you must

deliver it. It is a good point about the Liberal Democrats with tuition

fees because that is a classic example of something they give a

commitment to do. The justification of being in coalition didn't wash.

It didn't wash. It damaged them terribly. You can see that it did

long-term damage in the next Parliament. The Labour manifesto, a

lot of it was leaked, and the upside is, of course, that voters got to

see some of the quite popular policies that Labour are putting

forward and the polling shows they are popular. People also saw,

forgive me, that the numbers didn't add up. It costs 7 billion to scrap

tuition fees. They are announcing 37 billion for the NHS. You talk about

the nationalisation, they will buy back into public ownership large

amounts of privatised utilities. This is not credible, it does not

add up, it costs a huge amount of money and there is no way they can

credibly raise this amount from tax. Helena Kennedy, the manifesto on the

leadership, will the manifesto be the document, as Tim Bale said, for

activists and candidates out on the doorstep to move away from Jeremy

Corbyn's leadership which is not polling well? I'm sure on the

doorstep people are saying, look at what we are offering you, look at

the way we will take you back to a principle set of Labour policies,

which are about making sure you have living standards raised again, you

have proper jobs. Because Jeremy Corbyn isn't going to be the focal

point for the candidates? We've got to take it away from this business

which is let's keep talking about Jeremy Corbyn and the things he has

done in the past. He is key to your whole policy. Let's cast ahead to

the future, could there be a time that we don't have manifestos

bearing in mind voters are cynical about parties for one reason or

another when they don't follow through on those policies and their

breeches for manifesto commitments. Is it really worth doing? I think he

will never have a situation where party doesn't have a manifesto. A

big written document? We can have a discussion about how long it should

be. 25,000 words is probably a bit on the long side. But there will

always be a document which people can refer to once the party wins the

election, whichever party it is, that they can measure the

performance of the party and government to what they said. You've

always got to have that degree of accountability. What about the big

reveal? Quite often in a manifesto there is a sort of an offer, a

reveal that captures the imagination. What should that be in

the Conservative manifesto? I think today with what we are doing with

workers' rights, it is a bit together the interesting and

exciting development for the Conservative Party. As the Prime

Minister said, this is the biggest and widest extension of workers'

rights any Conservative government will have proposed. And four Labour?

I think it is the fact there will be a complete rethinking on the whole

tax system and what you have called the Robin Hood tax in fact will

actually take us back to the kind of things Labour should have talked

about for many years. Are you looking forward to them coming out

and will you be studying them in detail? I am and even though they

are academic I will be studying them. They will be piling up on your

desk. Thank you for joining us. Let's get a round-up of all

the other campaign news today. Over to you. I certainly am and for

anyone out there pounding the pavements on the campaign trail

today, good luck to them because it's pretty wet around.

So I'm out here in solidarity with them. In the mixed today for you we

have a new signing 14 Labour, a Conservative councillor who has come

a cropper on Twitter, and if there is any secret One Direction fans you

are watching, and you know who you are, we have something for you too.

Sit back and enjoyed today's campaign round-up.

The former Communist Party member and senior United official Andrew

Murray is reported to have joined Labour's campaign team, he is a

long-standing friend and ally of Jeremy Corbyn and Exchequer of the

Stop the War Coalition. Andrew Murray is said to be on secondment

to help Labour's final push in the general election campaign. Labour

told us it does not comment on staffing markets. Meanwhile there is

a Labour Party split in Liverpool. Anderson is reported to have vowed

never to work with Daniel Carden the man selected over him to be Labour's

MP candidate. In a message leaked to the Liverpool Echo Mayor Anderson

reportedly wrote I will not work with him either now or in the

future. A Conservative councillor has been suspended for an offensive

tweet about gypsies which appeared on his account during the Eurovision

Song Contest. Nick Harrington of Warwick District Council has been

relieved of his duties at the six months. The authorities said an

internal investigation is planned. At a London press conference Ukip's

economy spokesman today talked about the party deciding to stand aside in

some seats for pro Brexit candidates. I think it's just a

radically changed political context in which accounts for the fewer

number of candidates. The party is fielding a much reduced number of

candidates compared with the 2015 general election. Nicola Sturgeon

put in an appearance at a rather soggy Hamilton this morning. The

First Minister says she wants whoever the next Prime Minister is

to include the Scottish Government at the Brexit negotiating table. At

least one person was feeling the love.

Tim Farron's been addressing the Royal College nursing. Does it feel

like conversation and debate in this country has been closed in some way?

The Prime Minister and her senior colleagues hiding away from the

public. He took a swipe at Theresa May for

not fronting up in the TV debates. While One Direction star Harry

Stiles has come out as a Remainer, saying he is behind whoever is

against Brexit. Tim Farron said Harry is right, the only direction

the government is going in is the wrong one.

Now, in the run up to the General Election we've been

taking a look at some of the smaller parties hoping to win seats.

Today it's the turn of the English Democrats.

The English Democrats was founded in 2002, and is campaigning

It currently has around 2500 followers on Twitter.

It wants a referendum on the creation of an English Parliament.

And it's calling for the Barnett Formula to be scrapped.

The party condemns political correctness,

It also wants to make it compulsory for all state-maintained public

buildings in England to fly the English flag.

And the leader Robin Tilbrook joins me now.

Welcome back to the Daily Politics. You are calling for a referendum for

an Ingush parliament. Do you think there is an appetite for another

referendum bearing in mind we have had quite a lot recently. I think

there might well be. We will certainly give it a go and see where

we stand in the selection to make that point and to get people to

start thinking about what should happen for England. Because after

all, we were talking about the manifestos, but the fact is none of

the establishment parties are going to do anything in the way of an

English manifesto. They have Scottish manifestos, Welsh

manifestos but nothing for England. As a result of that do you think

there is an appetite for the outcome you are proposing if they were to be

a referendum on an Ingush parliament? There isn't any

interest. When returning my nomination papers the returning

officer said he felt pretty sure if the English were asked in an

independence referendum for Scotland they would vote overwhelmingly that

the Scots should go. If you look at your support it has dropped

dramatically from 2010 two 2015 and in 2015 new fielded 35 candidates

and now you are fielding seven. It feels as if this is a diminishing

party in that sense. I don't think we are a diminishing party. In

fairness we were thinking the election would be in 2020. I take

that note and you were not alone in. As a result of that you offer is a

bit meagre, let us put it like that. That is fair but we thought we would

do an effort in the Manchester mayoral election and we did

reasonably well, we beat Ukip in the Manchester mayoral elections and we

were feeling quite pleased with ourselves until we suddenly had a

snap election and we were left with a situation where we were not really

prepared for that. Ukip is also under pressure as the local

elections proved. Do you think it's over for pro Brexit anti-immigration

parties like yourselves? No. It may be for Ukip. Ukip is specifically

about the UK Independence Party as we are about England. Being this

question has not really started to be properly addressed by the British

establishment. You think there is support for it but there is no

evidence there would be. I put to you again. Opinion polls have asked

whether even should this Parliament and over 60% supported. I do think

there is support. OK, if you are right, David Cameron picked up on

that and introduced English votes for English laws. So he answered

your question. I don't think he did, the English votes for English laws

system is very technical. It doesn't really give an answer to the English

question, which the government's inquiry was... He would say it was

putting England first. It was a first offer. We were not against him

doing it but at the same time I don't think it gets anywhere near

the realist you, which is not just about the representation of an

English Parliament. It's also about government. And in fact, one of the

interesting things about the manifesto leak we had with Labour,

is for the first time it looks like there is a British establishment

party going to say there should be Secretary of State for Scotland,

which there is already, but also for England.

One of the things Theresa May has said in this election that

extremists are seeking to divide and separatists are trying to break up

this country. Who do you think she was talking about? I would certainly

think she meant by separatist, some of the things Mike Iupati because we

are separatist. We do want to see England as a separate nation state.

What's wrong with that? IME unionist so I believe in the argument against

Scottish independence. Do you think English rights are properly

represented? As Robin suggests there is a debate about the nature of the

union, people like Robin Redwood in my party, David Cameron bringing

forward English votes for English laws, this is something that is

subject to debate but I'm not sure the best vehicle to announce the

Mark Evans it is Robin's party and that's why I am a conservative. --

best vehicle to There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz. The question was what did

Russian President, Vladimir Putin do before

meeting Chinese President A) Ride through Beijing

on a Harley Davidson. B) Explore sunken shipwrecks

in the South China Sea. C) Practise judo with a Chinese

national champion or D) play Soviet

era songs on a grand piano. Have you got the answer? I am

struggling with this one. I think the piano sounds plausible. Helena?

I think he went to the South China Sea to Sea shipwrecks. Let's see who

is right. Now, one might say Kwasi Kwarteng is

right, he was playing old Soviet songs on the piano.

They are not exactly once I was familiar with. What do you think? Is

it time to stick to the day job rather than being a concert pianist.

I was struggling, I didn't recognise the tune. You didn't recognise the

tunes at all. We're used to him being bare-chested and riding. Their

chested and deep sea diving! That's all for today -

thanks to our guests. Particularly for you for being our

guests of the day. I'll be here at noon tomorrow

with all the big political stories